Utah Considering Nuclear Power Plants - Is it Feasible?

[BHopkins]

This is a perfect opportunity for more AP1000's. The FOAK penalty was paid at Vogtle, any subsequent ones should be cheaper. As already noted, if you are already using coal, which uses water for cooling, you can do nuclear on the same site.

A fully depreciated nuke produces power for around $0.03-$0.04/kWh, but you've gotta pay back that CAPEX first.

Interesting you should share this. The article actually mentioned the possibility of converting four of Utah's power plants, from coal to nuclear. Three of them have planned decommission dates, with two of them in the near (2028 and 2030) future.

https://www.ksl.com/article/5118418...to-utahs-skyrocketing-energy-demands-cox-says

 

[BMWTurboDzl]

Do we even have the expertise to build a new nuclear plant?

Yes depending on the design.

 

[BMWTurboDzl]

An article on one of the Utah news sites quotes the Utah governor, as recommending that Utah needs to consider nuclear power plants, to provide for our future power demand in the state.

I'm all for more nuclear power plants here in the states. But I've often doubted if nuclear power plants are a good fit for Utah. Utah is one of the driest states in the nation. Perhaps my understanding is outdated, but I have always understood that nuclear power plants require a lot of water for cooling.

Can a nuclear power plant work without a fairly large water source? Or can they use cooling towers for cooling, similar to coal plants?

I imagine the people of St. George may need some convincing that they can trust the govt.

https://deq.utah.gov/public-interes...om-aboveground-nuclear-tests-on-southern-utah

 

[Urshurak776]

I imagine the people of St. George may need some convincing that they can trust the govt.

https://deq.utah.gov/public-interes...om-aboveground-nuclear-tests-on-southern-utah

23 years in Submarines with a nuclear reactor 20 feet from my pillow. 637 class hotspots not withstanding, my exposure is quite small. I did everything but shower with a TLD for years.

Not, even a little bit, an issue.

 

[BMWTurboDzl]

23 years in Submarines with a nuclear reactor 20 feet from my pillow. 637 class hotspots not withstanding, my exposure is quite small. I did everything but shower with a TLD for years.

Not, even a little bit, an issue.

It's not the exposure per se but the trust insuring that there will be no exposure (ex, accidents due to shortcuts or human error).

 

[alarmguy]

It's not the exposure per se but the trust insuring that there will be no exposure (ex, accidents due to shortcuts or human error).

There’s been one tiny accident in the United States in 50 years and that was a very long time ago
No one was harmed
The odds are you will die walking out the front door of your home is probably 100,000 times greater

Never mind the food that people eat that is probably 1 million times greater

 

[BMWTurboDzl]

There’s been one tiny accident in the United States in 50 years and that was a very long time ago
No one was harmed
The odds are you will die walking out the front door of your home is probably 100,000 times greater

Never mind the food that people eat that is probably 1 million times greater

Right but again the world depends on humans and humans with their bad decisions set the industry back decades. Consequently the perceived margin for error is infinitely smaller with regards to nuclear. This is why it's so expensive to implement. The design must be essentially fail-safe without human intervention.

 

[KrisZ]

There’s been one tiny accident in the United States in 50 years and that was a very long time ago
No one was harmed
The odds are you will die walking out the front door of your home is probably 100,000 times greater

Never mind the food that people eat that is probably 1 million times greater

Look at what happened to Germany after Fukushima. Fear is the enemy of rational thought.

 

[BHopkins]

I imagine the people of St. George may need some convincing that they can trust the govt.

https://deq.utah.gov/public-interes...om-aboveground-nuclear-tests-on-southern-utah

That was a very long time ago. And while St. George has a fairly large population of retirees, that may be old enough to remember that time, the vast majority of St. George's older population did not live in St. George, let alone Washington County, during the early 1960's. They are mostly all transplants, looking to retire in a warmer climate.

According to census records, 1960 Washington County population was about 10,000. I suspect a very generous guestimate may be < 1,000 of those 10,000 still live in the area. That is a very small fraction of the 184,000 Washington County residences today.

 

[Urshurak776]

It's not the exposure per se but the trust insuring that there will be no exposure (ex, accidents due to shortcuts or human error).

All sites overseen by Naval Reactors. Not many incidents in a very very long time. The record more than stands for itself.

If you saw what we had to go through to do something as simple as replace a 2 foot piece of 1/4" gage line, you would know what I mean when I say the safety factors are like 100:1. These Rx's are operated in such a way that it is as safe as humans can make it.

The garbage truck flying through your neighborhood is more dangerous. Not kidding. I will say that your post does highlight how little the bulk of the population really knows and understands nuclear power. I also smile when I hear a media talking head say "Giving the President the nuclear keys or codes." Doesn't even remotely work that way.........

 

[BMWTurboDzl]

All sites overseen by Naval Reactors. Not many incidents in a very very long time. The record more than stands for itself.

If you saw what we had to go through to do something as simple as replace a 2 foot piece of 1/4" gage line, you would know what I mean when I say the safety factors are like 100:1. These Rx's are operated in such a way that it is as safe as humans can make it.

The garbage truck flying through your neighborhood is more dangerous. Not kidding. I will say that your post does highlight how little the bulk of the population really knows and understands nuclear power. I also smile when I hear a media talking head say "Giving the President the nuclear keys or codes." Doesn't even remotely work that way.........

Sure but at what cost? Cost comes with safety. The USN is operating in a vastly different environment compared to the Japanese version of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. The USN has no profit motive.

 

[Urshurak776]

Sure but at what cost? Cost comes with safety. The USN is operating in a vastly different environment compared to the Japanese version of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. The USN has no profit motive.

Yup. Expensive. Can't have 99.9999999% safe and low cost. Doesn't work that way.

All Rx authority in USA goes through Naval Reactors. Civilian, US Navy ships, etc. I honestly don't know how profit works for a civilian plant, but I know the safety requirements are non-negotiable.

I can tell you that I work for a large HVAC Company and we are working with a large data center. I wrote a proposal recently for just storage requirements for a whole bunch of large chillers. Bill for 80 week storage requirements (not counting the facilities themselves) but just for the monthly, quarterly, annual maintenance requirements (make sure N2 is on both refrigerant and water sides, etc.) was over a few million dollars. We submitted on a Thursday and Friday morning had a purchase order. I don't even see how they looked at it. It's like Monopoly money. The data centers/AI is an insane amount of money, so not surprised they're looking for nuclear power to power these beasts.

 

[Vil_Riker]

Look at what happened to Germany after Fukushima. Fear is the enemy of rational thought.

It was a golden opportunity for them to push an unpopular policy.

 

[goingplacesanddoingstuff]

There are pros and cons to the water situation. A low water table has advantages from a pollution standpoint.

Most of Utah’s population lives in the seismically active basin & range extensional zone, so a facility would need to be adequately designed for earthquakes. The risk is not as high as the west coast, but still present to some degree.

 

[BHopkins]

There are pros and cons to the water situation. A low water table has advantages from a pollution standpoint.

Most of Utah’s population lives in the seismically active basin & range extensional zone, so a facility would need to be adequately designed for earthquakes. The risk is not as high as the west coast, but still present to some degree.

Earthquake risk is definitely something to consider, when designing and locating a facility with inherent risks.

None of the four coal powered plants that are being considered for retrofit to nuclear power, are near the major fault zones in Utah, so they probably have very low earthquake risks. To mitigate the risk, it would seem that any new nuclear power plant could also be built somewhere more distant from the major fault zones in Utah.

 

[PandaBear]

If they could get the electricity here "too cheap to meter" I'd consider going with electric heat!

Nothing in the world is too cheap to meter in the end. It will eventually be taxed as a result in human civilization history.

 

[PandaBear]

Probably another tech giant wants to power their AI for cheap. The sudden interest in nuclear and the increasing power requirements for developing AI surely aren’t coincidental.

That, and we are still digesting all the excess capital at lowish interest rate trying not to overpay for any assets. Stock is too high, gold is too high, bond interest is too low, inflation is too high. They already buy up farmlands, single family homes, Fed bonds, gold, etc. They need new assets created for investment holding. I think a good and reliable nuke with guaranteed demand is a highly valuable assets.

 

[goingplacesanddoingstuff]

Earthquake risk is definitely something to consider, when designing and locating a facility with inherent risks.

None of the four coal powered plants that are being considered for retrofit to nuclear power, are near the major fault zones in Utah, so they probably have very low earthquake risks. To mitigate the risk, it would seem that any new nuclear power plant could also be built somewhere more distant from the major fault zones in Utah.

There is a common public misconception that all faults are mapped. The vast majority of faults are not mapped, in fact. There are areas of known higher fault density and seismic activity, of course.

If it’s in Utah, it’s near potentially active faults - just something to budget and engineer for. Almost every mountain face in western Utah is a fault scarp.